Jikan wrote:The problem with making unsubstantiated claims, or claims that cannot be verified by reason or evidence, is that it amounts to wrong speech.

you mean like claims of termas being dug up after being buried by Guru Rinpoche, footprints left in stone of various buddhist saints (every monastery in Tibet has a bunch of these), spontaneously manifest statues, the Garuda claw in Drigung Til Monastery, mediums channeling various Buddhist "spirits", divinations, and about 80% of actual Tibetan Buddhism as it is practiced by Tibetans? Or maybe the TB weenies here are willing to either A) overlook this stuff because Western Tibetan Buddhism is so much more evolved, we can live with the mild embarrassment of Tibetan Buddhism as practiced by Tibetans? or B) believe in all that stuff, even though it has no more basis than most of David Icke's claims?

Whatever similarities you may find with regards to scientific evidence or lack of same, there is a very large difference in cosmology and orientation between Tibetan Buddhism and Icke. The latter is making totally unsubstantiated claims against real people, there is a link to his site portraying the Dalai Lama as a Nazi crook for instance (not as a serpent though). Icke is feeding off people's basic hates and fears. It's paranoiac populism of the worst kind. No offense intended to anyone.

Jikan wrote:The problem with making unsubstantiated claims, or claims that cannot be verified by reason or evidence, is that it amounts to wrong speech.

you mean like claims of termas being dug up after being buried by Guru Rinpoche, footprints left in stone of various buddhist saints (every monastery in Tibet has a bunch of these), spontaneously manifest statues, the Garuda claw in Drigung Til Monastery, mediums channeling various Buddhist "spirits", divinations, and about 80% of actual Tibetan Buddhism as it is practiced by Tibetans? Or maybe the TB weenies here are willing to either A) overlook this stuff because Western Tibetan Buddhism is so much more evolved, we can live with the mild embarrassment of Tibetan Buddhism as practiced by Tibetans? or B) believe in all that stuff, even though it has no more basis than most of David Icke's claims?

You are grossly misrepresenting Buddhism and are in breach of ToS. I have reported this post.

Shakyamuni existed and taught Dharma. Can you show us a Lizard person in the Royal family?

Reductio ad absurdum logic based on a daft premise - that's all I see from the Icky camp.

gregkavarnos wrote:You do realise that you are posting on "A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism"? Right?

its the "lounge," mr. thought police.

Now if you believe that Icke's claims are comparable to the (apparent) beliefs found in TB then I would have to say that you have no idea about what TB is really about. I mean, really... If you think that believing that the world is run by a secret society of extraterrestrial aliens is the path which leads to the end of suffering, well... The video is titled "How to Free Your Mind", you really believe that is what Icke's theories are about? Freeing one's mind? Or maybe you believe that TB is not about freeing one's mind?

Ask yourself: is the propitiation of Nagas a central practice in TB for the attainment of enlightenment? If the answer is yes, then I will have to agree that TB does not differ an iota from Icke's theories. But, wait on, Icke wants to overthrow the ruling reptiles and usher in a kind of rainbow Fascism, whereas TB is interested in satisfying the Naga (and all other sentient beings) in order to end suffering. Does that make them the same then?

I mean really, you've got a brain, put it to use. Don't wait for everything to be offered to you on a silver platter.

so I assume you opt for option "A":

overlook this stuff because Western Tibetan Buddhism is so much more evolved,we can live with the mild embarrassment of Tibetan Buddhism as practiced by Tibetans.

Thoroughly tame your own mind.This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.

It's got nothing to do with thought police, you are free to believe anything you want to. What I was pointing out was that is seems strange to me that you would be surprised that people on a Mahayana and Vajrayana forum would actually uphold and/or support Mahayana and Vajrayana views and practices. I mean you have been here all this time and you haven't noticed this strange phenomenon yet?

It's got nothing to do with thought police, you are free to believe anything you want to. What I was pointing out was that is seems strange to me that you would be surprised that people on a Mahayana and Vajrayana forum would actually uphold and/or support Mahayana and Vajrayana views and practices. I mean you have been here all this time and you haven't noticed this strange phenomenon yet?

What I was pointing out was it seems funny to me (not strange - I have no illusions about the fundamentalist mindset) that people who participate in a system just overflowing with superstition (and I am not saying it is all superstition: just all the stuff I mentioned that comprises much "popular" Tibetan Buddhism as it is practiced in Tibet. Go there and see for yourself if you don't believe me), including beliefs in Nagas, would ridicule the notion of reptillians (alien or from the "underworld") meddling with human affairs. I mean, its practically the same belief, except in Tibetan Buddhism the Nagas get pissed off if you piss in their water and cause you illness & stuff, and in the more contemporary mythos, they (reptillians) have been messing with our DNA and manipulating us all along. Maybe both have a grain of truth in them? Its not as simple as, "either the Queen is a lizard, or the whole concept is bunk." start with the stuff you already believe in about Nagas and Nagarjuna getting the PP Sutras from them, and just think about it a bit.

Thoroughly tame your own mind.This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.

It's got nothing to do with thought police, you are free to believe anything you want to. What I was pointing out was that is seems strange to me that you would be surprised that people on a Mahayana and Vajrayana forum would actually uphold and/or support Mahayana and Vajrayana views and practices. I mean you have been here all this time and you haven't noticed this strange phenomenon yet?

What I was pointing out was it seems funny to me (not strange - I have no illusions about the fundamentalist mindset) that people who participate in a system just overflowing with superstition (and I am not saying it is all superstition: just all the stuff I mentioned that comprises much "popular" Tibetan Buddhism as it is practiced in Tibet. Go there and see for yourself if you don't believe me), including beliefs in Nagas, would ridicule the notion of reptillians (alien or from the "underworld") meddling with human affairs. I mean, its practically the same belief, except in Tibetan Buddhism the Nagas get pissed off if you piss in their water and cause you illness & stuff, and in the more contemporary mythos, they (reptillians) have been messing with our DNA and manipulating us all along. Maybe both have a grain of truth in them? Its not as simple as, "either the Queen is a lizard, or the whole concept is bunk." start with the stuff you already believe in about Nagas and Nagarjuna getting the PP Sutras from them, and just think about it a bit.

You are associating Vajrayana with a single individual's fantasy.

By all means justify Icke, but stop trashing the Vajrayana in some kind of feeble attempt to validate your view. Post reported again.

gad rgyangs wrote:What I was pointing out was it seems funny to me (not strange - I have no illusions about the fundamentalist mindset)

So you are accusing me of being a fundamentalist because I do not agree with Icke's ideas? I mean you consider that a person that does not agree with every crack pot theory that comes along and questions it unless provided with evidence of its veracity, is a fundamentalist?

Let's talk about termas, since you mentioned them. Do you know that there are TB organisations out there currently burying termas from high ranking tulku all over the planet and keeping track of where they are being buried so that they can be dug up and used in the future? And you know what? Some ignoramus, in the future, will be there to doubt that the terma being presented were ever written by the tulku (who may, like Guru Rinpoche, have passed into mythological status) and attribute it all to unintelligent/uneducated/superstitious mythoplasis. Sound familiar? Be sure to chew the shoe well before swallowing.

...in Tibetan Buddhism the Nagas get pissed off if you piss in their water and cause you illness & stuff

So you believe that pissing in peoples drinking water does not "cause you illness and stuff"?

...start with the stuff you already believe in about Nagas and Nagarjuna getting the PP Sutras from them, and just think about it a bit.

How can you possibly know what I believe in? Are you a mind reader or something?

I have not said I believe what Icke is saying, he's certainly not the only one talking about reptillians, or the first. I'm talking about connecting two mythologies: a 2000 year old Indian one about Nagas and our contemporary one about reptillians. And while we're at it, lets throw in the serpent in the Garden of Eden too. Are they all metaphors for kundalini? Or is kundalini the evidence of our own kinship with these critters (ever heard of the part of our brain that is called "reptillian"?).

Thoroughly tame your own mind.This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.

gad rgyangs wrote:I have not said I believe what Icke is saying, he's certainly not the only one talking about reptillians, or the first. I'm talking about connecting two mythologies: a 2000 year old Indian one about Nagas and our contemporary one about reptillians. And while we're at it, lets throw in the serpent in the Garden of Eden too. Are they all metaphors for kundalini? Or is kundalini the evidence of our own kinship with these critters (ever heard of the part of our brain that is called "reptillian"?).

Dear g g, trying too hard to draw associations is just as harmful as trying too hard to find divisions. Sometimes similarities (and differences) are just circumstantial. For example, somebody in another thread pointed out the similarities between one type of script (runic) with another (which I cannot remember). Now there may be some connecion between the two languages, or it just may be that when you are chiselling script into rock with "primitive" tools there is only so much you can do (normally you are confined to using only straight lines).

Interesting^, as Phoenician—a parent of Orkhon—is rooted in the 'Afro-Asiatic' family of languages, and the First Root Race who are said to have used Runic script are described as having been Black in color.

Maybe I should re-post this in the Tengriism thread, as there's a lot more I'd like to discuss about this. Typing and web-searching on this phone takes literally five times longer than a PC or laptop unfortunately....

Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:56 pm, edited 5 times in total.

The only really interesting thing about Mr Icke is that he was formerly a professional footballer. He was the goalkeeper for one of the lower league sides (?Hereford) way back when. Goalkeepers are often thought to be a bit odd, but nothing like this...

Edwards: You are a philosopher. Dr Johnson: I have tried too in my time to be a philosopher; but, I don't know how, cheerfulness was always breaking in.

while it can seem so innocuously "comparative mythology" in these terms, things get more interesting when you consider that, for example, when Namkhai Norbu speaks about Nagas, he is clearly not talking about mythology: as far as he is concerned, they are real entities. If that is the case, then what else might be going on out there, what might Nagas be up to beyond the traditional understanding of them in Tibetan culture? This is the question. Surely one would not seriously consider that the Tibetan typology of spirits is exhaustive and complete, that there is no possibility of entities outside their cultural understanding. Therefore it may not be wise to dismiss out of hand claims about various entities and their activities, even if it cannot be fitted into one's Tibetan box of understanding. I would expect instead that those familiar with the Tibetan cultural views of entities would perhaps be the most open to at least considering that "there is more in heaven and earth than is dreamt of in Tibet philosophy."

Thoroughly tame your own mind.This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.

You have to be very careful with what kind of guest you let into your mind - you never know what kind of wierdos they are and as we all should know, there are a lot of wierdos out there (or rather, in there). I've heard even Brahma can be a bit wacky sometimes.

It might be helpful to recall that Icke lives in a world where objective realities, such as alien lizardoid life forms, really exist.

The reality of our own nagas, and the realms where they swim, perhaps can only be really apprehended from the perspective of gnyis med, nonduality - there is no inside/outside.

That's not what I meant to imply. What I meant is that Wikipedia is very mainstream or conventional, and even it admits as much about the two writing systems. Although I guess it was kind of pointless for me to even mention that, when all one has to do is compare Orkhon to Runes to see that not only are they very similar, but also that they have some identical characters.

Lhug-Pa wrote:The characters of the mentioned Orkhon script not only look like Runes, some of them ARE Runes.Even Wikipedia says about them:"Thomsen described the script as "Turkish Runes"

So if somebody talks about the english and tibetan alphabet, just because they mentioned the word alphabet (and pointed to a couple of similar characters in the script) it makes them the same language??? A classic case of trying to hard to find associations!

...as Phoenician—a parent of Orkhon—is rooted in the 'Afro-Asiatic' family of languages, and the First Root Race who are said to have used Runic script are described as having been Black in color.

There goes your obsessive ideation again. You really do find it difficult to keep it in check don't you? Everything has to tie back into this theory in order to make sense to you. That's really sad.